By Rhianna McGhee (she/her)

You would think, 2023, a well-advanced socie­ty? Think again.

Yes, we are technologically thriving, and there are, of course, many positive attempts at social inclusion. Yet, with layers of bias still in­grained in our society, it feels difficult to say that such traditional values in the workplace will ever fully cease to exist.

I write this, sitting here with 11 tattoos, 10 piercings, and purple hair. It’s common knowledge that, on paper, these attributes would be deemed unprofessional by the likes of bank­ing groups and high-flying organisations. But what I truly want to highlight is that the social stigma surrounding self-expression runs right through the industries you would least expect.

In the process of making an Espresso Martini, my manager deemed my short-sleeved shirt inappropriate for the workplace. I under­stand that this was a relatively swanky bar, but I don’t think the tipsy middle-aged mum in front of me was offended by the dragonfly upon my wrist – she was for sure just gasping for her cocktail. Now, I appreciate that this may not be the case for other establishments within the hos­pitality world, but it just goes to show that these values are still inherent to large parts of society.

The question of fairness is key here. As I embark on applying to the likes of the BBC or The Guardian for a graduate job, it’s almost comical to think that, although I’m fully quali­fied with great experience, they could fully come back to me with a no after taking one look at me.

I think the biggest problem today is the ambiguity of this situation. By this, I mean that, at least 20 or 30 years ago, if I rocked up to a job interview brimming with ‘self-expression’ I would know the answer straight away. Now­adays, it’s a lucky draw – there is no standard a­nymore, and this is, in my opinion, worse. I’d like to know beforehand if I’m wasting my time rather than getting my hopes up for nothing. Ob­viously I massively disagree with the idea that your appearance is a hindrance to your work, but some damage control would help. I’d simply avoid the close-minded corporations, but per­haps this is the problem: I’m sticking a plaster over the wound and choosing to look for the welcoming alternative instead of challenging those who would deem me unprofessional.

Alternatively, we’re also at a point in time when there is a massive inclusion for self-expression. That’s the dilemma; my argu­ment is ambiguous at best. Everything I say, I can immediately undermine with something else. We quite often see newsreaders covering their arms – who knows what’s under there? Maybe they’re covered in tattoos and simply choose to cover up for TV purposes. I would argue that this isn’t diminishing their self-ex­pression at the behest of professionalism, but merely taking the viewers’ eyes to the more important story. They’ve still got the job in the end.

This is such a difficult debate, and I can grasp both ends of the stick, really. For me, the problematic part of it all is in the demoralising view. I can accept that at times my tattoos may be better under a long-sleeved shirt. Neverthe­less, don’t treat me less for looking individual. That’s the moral of my story.